~ Freedom and Natural Law

Monthly Archives: June 2013

Friday is the one-year anniversary of the old site! Stay tuned for some exciting updates and changes in the very near future!

Paul Craig Roberts has a great column (as usual) concerning the complete and total illegitimacy that is the U.S. government. Read A New Beginning Without Washington’s Sanctimonious Mask — Paul Craig Roberts for his insightful analysis of the Snowden affair and the larger picture of U.S. foreign relations and human rights abuses. There are some incredible quotes in this article. “The United States has gone from a model of human rights to an eavesdropper on personal privacy, the manipulator of the centralized power over the international internet, and the mad invader of other countries’ networks. . . The world will remember Edward Snowden. It was his fearlessness that tore off Washington’s sanctimonious mask.” – The People’s Daily, China.

We’ve come full circle. When I was growing up Russia and China were totalitarian nations with no respect for civil liberties; America was supposedly a free country and a bastion of freedom. In less than a few decades the filth in D.C. and their criminal collaborators have destroyed my home country. It’s surreal.

(President Obama receiving a report about Snowden. Google.)

In other news:

The Supreme Court (of Minas Morgul) acknowledged the federal government has no business or authority concerning marriage – kind of…

Another beloved NFL hero/thug, Aaron Hernandez (NE Patriots, Mass DOC), has been arrested in connection with a homicide. Keep the money coming…

The Empire is preparing war in Syria to make the world safe for al-CIA-da…

The Empire can (and does) kill dissenters by remotely making their “smart” cars go out of control…

The third-rate criminal cabal that is Richmond County, Georgia keeps finding new laws to break…

When a crowd gathered at an Atlanta shoe store, awaiting the release of the new LeBron James sneaker (got yours??), a thug decided to rob the good shoe-fanciers. He got more than he bargained for when a man stepped out of line and gunned him down. The local hero shot the punk and then hopped back in line! Taylor White, a sneaker-loving witness said in appreciation, “I salute the homie that did that.” America salutes too – our kind of homie. It is mathematically certain the criminal in question (in the pine box, rather) will never rob anyone again – ever. See: http://www.ajc.com/news/news/crime-law/cops-man-fatally-shot-attempting-to-rob-group/nYR7p/.

Did you know the IRS sends income tax refunds to illegal aliens? They do. In 2011 they sent over $46 Million dollars in refunds to just under 24,000 aliens (undocumented guest worker migrant whatever…). The catch is that those 24,000 folks all “reside” at the same address in Atlanta. Smell a rat? http://cnsnews.com/news/article/irs-sent-46378040-refunds-23994-unauthorized-aliens-1-atlanta-address. It appears this happens frequently. I see two possible explanations: 1) someone offers their address for filing usage for a fee or; 2) someone made up a bunch of fraudulent returns and is now a multi-millionaire. Either way, this wouldn’t be a problem if the IRS didn’t exist.

The Empire has filed a sealed indictment against Snowden. Many indictments are sealed preliminarily, no cause for alarm in and of itself. What is alarming is that an indictment means a grand jury voted for the government and against their own liberties. Who are these twelve toads??? Given the sad state of U.S. “justice” the grand jury might not really exist. Or, it could consist entirely of FBI agents. Or, John McInsane clones…

At least they still have the rule of law in Hong Kong. There, U.S. thugs attempted to get a local arrest warrant issued for Snowden. The Hong Kong government said the U.S. request did not comply with the law. Imagine that. As the U.S. government can’t comply with American law, how are they supposed to follow laws in another country? This is truly enlightening. To get the warrant the U.S. only had to show that Snowden was dangerous and posed a flight risk. Easy to prove with a traitor like Snowden, right, Rep. King? I would assume they set forth what they had in the way of allegations or evidence. It all evidently amounted to a big pile of nothing. Or, perhaps they thought the Hong Kong court would be a stupid and gullible as the American grand jury.

As is, Snowden has escaped the Stazi for now. If he gets asylum he would do well to remain deeply hidden until the U.S. Empire collapses or we suddenly return to the rule of law here.

Before I commence to rambling bout the late U.S. Constitution and thrilling you with some newsworthy news items I need to apologize for something.

This morning I cut down yet another set of punching bag chains. Sorry, dear EFC. Sometimes it’s not easy being the strongest man. This tragedy forced me to cut my routine down to 15 or so minutes. BTW, I expect the stronger chains I’ve been talking about will now be purchased – either that or just designate a steel box-beam for my future martial needs…

How about that Supreme Court? Always doing their part to check against unnecessary and illegal government abuses! Not.

In the wake of Maryland v. King, the NINE have just given us Salinas v. Texas, 570 U.S. ___, Slip Op. No. 12-246 (June 17, 2013).

(Supreme Court in action. Google.)

The Morgal Lords insist the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination “is not self-executing and that a witness who desires its protection must claim it.” Salinas, Slip Op. at 1. This means that now anything you say (OR DON’T SAY) can and will be used against you. The “in a court of law” stuff no longer applies as the court’s no longer are based in or bound by the law; courts exist now to provide the government with a convenient forum for railroading citizens – kind of like the old show trials of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. Welcome to Amerika.

The Court is dead wrong. The rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are Natural in origin and are, thus, self-executing. You need not declare that you have the right to free speech pursuant to the First Amendment before you speak your mind. Likewise, you don’t have to say that torture is cruel and unusual punishment, forbidden by the Eight Amendment, in order to not be tortured. At least that’s the way it was. Every time you do something you might want to cite to some right or something from now on. Then again, if we all do that, the Court will “presto, change” change the law again. It’s a no-win situation.

What is truly evil is that the people are expected to declare their rights as set forth in the Constitution in order to justify protection while the government will never cite the Constitution for any authority for the horrible things they do. This is called tyranny.

Justice Breyer was correct in his dissent: “No ritualistic formula is necessary in order to invoke the privilege.” Id, at Dissent 9. Rights simply are or, they were, back when Amerika was America.

The voting was a bit odd considering the split in Maryland v. King. Rather than stand with the people and the dissent of the “liberals,” Justice Scalia sided with the majority. None of this matters. The votes change from case to case but the uselessness of the Court is consistent. That’s all that really matters.

In effect the Court placed fresh green sod on the grave of the Fifth Amendment. The Fifth is conveniently buried next to the Fourth at the Constitutional Memorial Gardens. Stop by to pay your respects.

The News:

I don’t know how Will Grigg finds these stories but check out his latest report on the police state: http://lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w328.html. Will reports on the shooting dead (at the bloody hands of our brave public servants) of a 7 year old girl in Detroit. The weapon used caught my eye. The little girl was murdered by a stormtrooper wielding an H&K MP5. Remember that picture of the SS goon pointing the sub-machine gun at little Elian Gonzalez? That was an MP5 (Navy model, I think). I see a pattern here. Where are the gun-control folks on this trend???

(Protecting the children. Google.)

Here’s more proof I am ahead of my time. Will all the “recent” revelations about NSA and other government spying on us, a criminal defendant in Florida is attempting to use the system’s vast heft against it. See: http://www.infowars.com/lawyers-eye-nsa-data-as-treasure-trove-for-evidence-in-murder-divorce-cases/. The man says certain records, previously stolen by the Empire will prove his innocence. Accordingly, he has demanded they be produced by the state. They won’t be. Those records are for THEM only, never for us.

I contemplated this issue four or five years ago in a civil case. Much hung on alleged phone calls from an “untraceable” cell phone. There appeared to be no way to verify if the calls were made. I suggested a request to the NSA as I knew (four or five years ago!) about their schemes. My strategy went nowhere fast. Still, I am a trend-setter.

Some other crazy stuff is going on but I am out of time. More to come. Hang in there, comrades!

Yes, yes. The Alabama coppers were only taken “volunteer” samples for “research” – FOR NOW, if we can believe them at all (I do not). And, they were not just swabbing, they were drawing blood! All for your safety or some such shit. We can change old joke now: Why wasn’t Jesus born in Alabama? New answer: He was afraid of having his blood drawn at an illegal stazi roadblock! Hahahahaha! The joke is on us, fellow Americans.

Meanwhile, more details about the NSAIRSCIAFBISSKGB surveillance of YOU keep coming out. The media are trying to slander and discredit Mr. Snowden for his brave actions. The government is prepping a drone, no doubt. Ah, Amerika, the greatest country in the world!

Off subject: did my fantasy actually get projected into Harry Reid’s reality???

(Looks like someone landed one!)

Okay! Now for some happy news and a happy picture. In furtherance of my developing public speaking career, I have completed the Steve Siebold Free Speaking Course (.com)!!! I earned a certificate suitable for framing:

(Snowden has pledged his life, his fortune, and his sacred honor for Liberty. What have you done lately?)

The fascists nuts have already called for his head. Some want him executed, though this presumes a trial of some sort. They are living in the past. More up-to-date neo-con nuts are talking about “disappearing” Snowden. That means death by torture at some secret CIA prison or by Hellfire missile. No need to bother a judge or jury that way.

The revelations Mr. Snowden has bravely given us of late are disturbing or, at least, would disturb earlier Americans. However, the information is nothing new. The government has been intercepting, recording, and reviewing almost all electronic communications since the 1990s. Remember Echelon and Carnivore? The freedom-minded should. Most will not. Prism is just a newer, better system.

The system just keeps getting bigger and better and it will thus continue. As recently as three or four decades ago someone would have raised the Fourth Amendment amidst all the discussion. Not now. The Constitutional protections enjoyed by previous generations are gone. I imagine with all this rain the new grass on the Fourth’s grave (see: Swabbing the Fourth Amendment) must be very green. Hopefully someone will mow it from time to time.

Dianne Fienstink, Saxby Shameless, Lindsey Sham, and the Criminal in Chief say we have nothing to worry about and that we should be grateful the Empire is watching out for us (by watching us). Everything these people say is a lie. They’re quotes are irrelevant and will not appear on this site.

On to happier topics! Did you know in Arizona swimming at a gym qualifies one for a DUI?? Read on about the ordeal of one Jessie Thornton of Surprise, AZ (town seems to live up to the name…): http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2013/06/10/man-charged-with-dui-despite-blowing-000-during-breathalyzer-test/. Like due process, evidence is a thing of the past in Amerika. At least Thornton was eventually released once the revenue farmers admitted they made a mistake. Increasingly, they just kill their victims instead. He was lucky. And, hey! It’s 2013. Let’s give the “driving while black” BS a rest. Snowden (or me or you) might be driving when the Predator locks on. It’s all of us nowadays, folks.

A while back I did a piece on Georgia’s Operation Rolling Plunder – a systematic raping of the rights of the motoring public. Today, the local fish-wrapper ran a story of their own about the issue: http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/crime-courts/2013-06-09/operation-thunder-pinpoints-traffic-problems?v=1370829896. If you bother to read the “article,” you’ll notice the complete deference to the lies of the government and the total absence of any opposing view. Half of the comments after the article are from government worshipers who “would gladly stop for more [illegal roadblocks].” They thank the stormtroopers for “making us safe.” Well, good on the other half, at least! Highway tip: avoid traveling in Georgia if you can. By the way, you might have noticed there were more citations for child seat “violations” than for DUIs. Keeping us safe – like sheep in a fence.

More to come soon. This post was brought to you by the NSA, the Illuminati, and the Governor’s Council for Sheep Safety.

Today I published Swabbing the Fourth Amendment, a look at the terrible decision in Maryland v. King (6/3/13, U.S.). Please click on the link or scroll down below and have a read. The implications for our future are dreadful, Justice Scalia’s witty dissent aside. On the site side, this represents my return to full-length legal columns after a month or so of dormancy. It’s good to be back!

I also updated the Hire Perrin! page today by describing in more detail the services I provide. I also added some fee prices. Please look at the Public Speaking section. If you need a speaker at your next Liberty-related function, please keep me in mind! Over the past year or so I have developed a reputation as a first-class keynote and training/panel speaker. It only seems logical to turn this skill into a business.

Today I responded to a comment on my old column, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Travesty. A reader made an excellent point about wolves versus wargs in Tolkienville and I responded with my interpretation of the issue. Like Ed Bruce sang: “there’s wolves and there’s wargs and there’s werewolves…” Watcha think???

The one-year anniversary of the old site is looming and I am busy preparing major changes. Stay tuned for an exciting summer!

Yesterday, June 3, 2013, the Supreme Court neatly planted new, green sod over the grave of the late Fourth Amendment. In Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. ___, Slip Op. No. 12-207 (June 3, 2013), the Court held, 5 – 4, obtaining DNA samples from criminal suspects via oral swabbing in permissible under the Fourth Amendment. The high priests of the Temple of “Justice” divined the procedure analogous to fingerprinting and photographing.

The growth of government power knows no bounds; the ruling itself was not a surprise. The nature of the close vote was, itself, of slight interest. The opinion was penned by Justice Anthony “Swing Man” Kennedy. Joining him were the arch-“conservative” trio of Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Alito, and Justice Thomas. “Liberal” milk toast Justice Breyer joined in for grins and giggles.

Standing firm for the Constitution and Liberty were the Court’s three Divas, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan. The ladies backed the dissent of Antonin Scalia, the originalists’ originalist and the only Justice usually worth reading or quoting. Scalia read his dissent aloud in Court. I’ll examine that dissent in a second.

(Putting the “justice” in Justice. Google.)

First, in all fairness, let me paraphrase the majority opinion for you: The government can (as always) do whatever the hell it wants. Good enough? Good.

Scalia began: “The Fourth Amendment forbids searching a person for evidence of a crime when there is no basis for believing the person is guilty of the crime or is in possession of incriminating evidence.” Maryland v. King, supra, at Slip. Op. Scalia Dissent 1. Citing the Virgina Declaration of Rights, § 10 (1776), Scalia recalled the Founder’s distrust and hatred for “general warrants” whereby persons were searched by the King’s agents without regard to evidence or suspicion. These warrants were, rightly, considered “grievous and oppressive…” Id, at Scalia 2.

Like most of the Bill or Rights, the Fourth Amendment has been under continual assault from an ever-growing list of “exceptions.” Scalia notes these, including suspicionless searches in public prisons…er…schools, but notes that they all (purportedly) derive from some extra-law enforcement need of society. He goes on to detail how the DNA swabs are intended only for general law enforcement purposes – for the gathering of evidence of criminal wrongdoing. Id, at 3 -4.

As usual Scalia blasts the majority with its own lame arguments: “The Court hastens to clarify that it does not mean to approve invasive surgery on arrestees or warrantless searches of their homes. [Internal Cite]. That the Court feels the need to disclaim these consequences is as damning a criticism of its suspicionless-search regime as any I can muster.” Id, at 4. “Sensing (correctly) that it needs more, the Court elaborates at length the ways that the search here served the special purpose of ‘identifying’ King. But that seems to me quite wrong – unless what one means by ‘identifying’ someone is ‘searching for evidence that he has committed crimes unrelated to the crime of his arrest.'” Id, at 5.

The process of “identifying” Mr. King by his DNA took many, many months. During that time King moved through many stages of the court process on his original charges. Maryland knew, without a doubt, who they were dealing with. The DNA was unnecessary for identification; rather, it was critical for a fishing expedition aimed at discovering other potential crimes also committed by King. This is an affront to both the Fourth and the Fifth Amendments. By the way, for viewing purposes, the Fifth is buried conveniently next to the Fourth at Constitutional Memorial Gardens.

“King was not identified by his association with the sample; rather, the sample was identified by its association with King. The Court effectively destroys its own ‘identification’ theory when it acknowledges that the object of this search was ‘to see what [was] already known about [King].'” Id, at 9. Both the Governor and the Attorney General of Maryland are on record praising DNA collection, not as a suspect identification, but as one designed to fight unsolved crimes.

Scalia knocked the assertion that DNA swabbing is no different, Fourth Amendment wise, than fingerprinting: “The Court asserts that the taking of fingerprints was constitutional for generations prior to the introduction’ of the FBI’s rapid computer-matching system. This bold assertion is bereft of citation to authority because there is none for it. The great expansion in fingerprinting came before the modern era of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, and so we were never asked to decide the legitimacy of the practice.” Id, at 15.

I love the following quote: “Solving unsolved crimes is a noble objective, but it occupies a lower place in the American pantheon of noble objectives than the protection of our people from suspicionless law-enforcement searches. The Fourth Amendment must prevail.” Id, at 17. Sadly, it did not prevail.

The following is also memorable and, in Scalia’s estimate, “most regrettable”: “All parties concede that it would have been entirely permissible, as far as the Fourth Amendment is concerned, for Maryland to take a sample of King’s DNA as a consequence of his conviction for second-degree assault. So the ironic result of the Court’s error is this: The only arrestees to whom the outcome here will ever make a difference are those who have been acquitted (so that their DNA could not have been taken upon conviction). In other words, this Act manages to burden uniquely the sole group for whom the Fourth Amendment’s protections ought to be most jealously guarded: people who are innocent of the State’s accusations.” Id, at 18.

Classic Scalia: “I doubt that the proud men who wrote the charter of our liberties would have been so eager to open their mouths for royal inspection. I therefore dissent…” Id, at 18.

(Say Ahhhhhh…for the children and such. Google.)

This ruling pushes us all a bit further down the slippery slope of the modern Amerikan police state. Scalia noted as much: “Searching every lawfully stopped car, for example, might turn up information about unsolved crimes the driver had committed…” Id, at 5. The King case concerned (nominally) serious cases, felonies. However, the next time you’re stopped for speeding or blowing through a stop sign, don’t be surprised if the officer demands you open your mouth for a good old swabbing. “If one believes that DNA will ‘identify’ someone arrested for assault, he must believe that it will ‘identify’ someone arrested for a traffic offense.” Id, at 17. It’s all for the children or something, you know…